16 THE VEDANTA AND ITS HEGELIAN CRITICS. [CHAP. II.

condition of his present embodied existence, to enrich, the conception
of Brahma in the Hegelian sense.

These writers entirely ignore the fact that the Indian Advaita is
the ultimate synthesis of thought, underlying the different teachings
of the Indian schools. They make no distinction between these
several schools, which, though, apparently different in their tenets,
are yet considered not as being in conflict with each. other, but as
steps to the attainment of the highest truth.,1 and which consequently
are all included under the general title of the Veddnta; nor do they
make any distinction between the two great monistic schools of Advaita
and Vishishtddvaita, represented respectively by 8hankar and Eama-
mrja. If these distinctions had been present to their mind, their
observations would not have been of so sweeping a character as they
are against the Indian. Veddnta in general. They would have at least
excepted the dualistic systems2 of Madhvacharya and Vallabhach.arya
and. the monistic teachings of the Eamanuja school, from the objec-
tion taken by them to the Indian Veddnta.

Eamanuja's view of Brahma and the creation may be gleaned from
the Shri Bhashya, which is his own commentary of the Vedtota
Sutras.3

The teachings of the Veddnta, according to him, are that there are
three ultimate entities known to philosophy; the intelligent indivi-
dual soul, the noil-intelligent matter, and God ; that God is the Sup-
reme Brahma, and is the cause of the universe, matter and soul con-
stituting his body or modes, prakdra, that the soul enters into matter
and thereby makes it live, and, similarly, God enters into matter
and soul, and guides them from within4; that Brahma is not devoid

1 See Mandukya Up. III. 18 and ground-work of each system, is but a
Shankar's Gloss thereon; Dvivedfs branch of one and the same universe
Edn., p. 73; cf. also Bhag. Git. V. 4-5. of thought." ' Hegel's Logic ' by Wallace,
See a reconciliation of the several sys" p. 22.

^ ^ ^T-p^103^ by ^?JX^Qana 2 These dualistic systems represent

^^T ^^ h" e ^ ^' a " return of Philosophy from the Lghte
terns of Indian Philosophy,'pp. 591-601. of speculation to the uncritical con-
This passage reminds one of the view pa-ntimio rrf ^mmr,n «,»„„ i, n i
which'Hegel Hmself has taken of the ^Tglot oT^entTaT ait^Tee
•AspeotfoftheVed^Mad^p. 18.

of Philosophy presents are not there- s Tlle references in this para. are to
fore irreconcilable with •unity. We ^6 Madras Translation of Shri Bhashya
may either say that it is one philosophy ^Y Messrs. EangacMrya and Varada-
at different degrees of maturity, or that ^J^
the particular principle, which is the 4 Wd. Introd. p. 2.